>>3638625>software that doesn't recognize the wider gamut color profile it will incorrectly assume that it's in sRGBThis depends on the software. Chrome assumes sRGB since version 61, which made much of the internet for desaturated as you described. Firefox does the same only for PNGs. Different file formats (JPG, BMP, GIF) in Firefox as well as prior versions of Chrome print out the full range of colour values to the monitor without conversion. You can see that in section 3 of the link I posted. Other software can make such arbitrary assumptions as well. There is no common default to all software.
I agree on shitty websites, AFAIK the thumbnails on 4chan are badly converted to sRGB as well.
>then converted itrelative colorimetric, absolute colorimetric or perceptual? This makes a huge difference, there is no "just convert it".
See
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/color-space-conversion.htm>Everything's in sRGB now.So if the final PNG is sRGB, that means that the left part has been converted to sRGB in the final step of your example and the right part has been converted in an additional step at an earlier stage. This means that in these two steps, different methods of conversion have been used, otherwise they would look identical. I assume that you converted the right part using a colorimetric method and the left part, implicitly by saving the whole image, using the perceptual method. (The right part doesn't change by saving the image as it is converted to sRGB already).
>>3633615Sorry to derail your thread, but I had to correct the wrong statements above.
To make it simple:
When you shoot in colour, make sure that your camera saves in Adobe RGB and that you edit in Adobe RGB (most editing programs do that properly). Then when you save/export the images from your editing program, make sure it is saved as sRGB. Editing in Adobe RGB gives you more freedom, saving as sRGB gives you compatibility. Preview of colour changes is called softproofing.
